Using the Transtheoretical Model in Leadership and Executive Coaching (Part 2/6)

In this six-part series, we will explore the Transtheoretical Model in coaching

Introduction

In the second of our 6-part series, we dive deeper into the Transtheoretical Model (TTM) for behavioral change.  In this segment we explore Stage 2 (Contemplation) and examine its relevance in leadership and executive coaching.  I will share examples drawing from past experiences with clients. (I have altered biographical and professional details to protect the confidentiality of my clients.  In some cases, I combine experiences with multiple clients into one example.) 

Stage 2 (Contemplation)

Stage 2, also known as Contemplation, occurs when the client is considering the possibility or idea of change.

Exploring Stage 2:  Stage 2 development involves the client contemplating the appropriateness of change.  This exploration focuses on the factors that support change and those that favor the status quo.  The act of analyzing variables for and against change supports the client’s decision-making process.  This is important because successful change requires the client possess a sense of ownership in the change process which include the empowerment to make their own choices.  If the client does not believe in the need for change or does not feel ownership in the decision to change, then the chances they will adopt, let alone commit to long-term change, diminishes.

As the client explores the idea of change, they inevitably begin to envision what change could look like, both personally and professionally.  It is important Stage 2 includes techniques to help the client engage in multi-perspective visioning.  This allows the client to expand their horizon and see a wider set of possibilities.  A significant variable influencing the client’s ability to envision the future is their sense of self.  This includes their self-confidence, self-esteem, and self-efficacy.  How the client sees themselves, their belief in their abilities and capabilities, will influence what their subconscious will allow them to envision. 

An important point to remember with Stage 2 clients, considering change is not the same as committing to change.  Sometimes, when a client recognizes the need for change, they may continue to feel ambivalent or have doubt even when adopting change, as in Rory’s case (see example from Stage 1).  Pushing a client to plan (Stage 3) or engage (Stage 4) in change when they are still considering change (Stage 2), may result in the client feeling overwhelmed and regressing to Stage 1 (i.e., they do not want to think about change anymore).  Stage 2 may just as easily result in a client deciding against change, the key here is in the quality and depth of thought that goes into whatever decision the client makes.

In leadership coaching, I frequently find clients considering the idea of change after receiving unexpected results from a 360-leadership assessment.  This surprising feedback can start the client in Stage 1 (see Jim, example from Stage 1).  Sometimes, a client will resist the feedback (see Carol, example from Stage 1).  Many times, a client will accept the feedback as indication some form of change may be necessary, like George.  But as you will see with George, just because a client considers change does not mean they will commit to or embrace change let alone be happy about it.  Skeptics can reluctantly commit to change.

George was a front-line supervisor with over thirty years’ experience, more than half of that time as a military leader.  Now retired and working as a civilian for a non-military government agency, George received feedback from a 360 assessment that his direct reports found him to be a micromanager, overly demanding, and inflexible.  At one point, several of his people went to his boss to complain and ask for reassignment.  George initially rejected this feedback, from his perspective his people were undisciplined, lazy, unmotivated, and entitled.  George also found their work sloppy and subpar.  He believed their feedback was nothing more than retribution for holding them accountable.  If you are thinking George is in Stage 1 you are correct.  For many people, their initial reaction to critical feedback (especially when unexpected) is often defensive, a common indicator of Stage 1.  Given time to process the experience and the support of a coach, people can move pass this initial reaction.  

With George’s permission, I spoke with direct reports and observed their behavior over time to get a sense of what factors might be fueling the issue.  While observing those involved, I began to see both perspectives.  George was prone to inflexibility, he demanded perfection, and he frequently micromanaged.  Conversely, his people cut corners, put forth products with glaring errors, and they did not seem overly committed to their jobs.  Our Stage 1 discourse involved a very deep exploration of the potential causes of the situation and the consequences of an enduring status quo.  This led to a discussion of cause and effect which prompted George to consider how his own behavior may have led to or contributed to his employees’ behavior.

I introduced several frameworks germane to sensemaking into my coaching approach with George.  As discussed earlier, sensemaking is a process of examination designed to shed light on a client’s perceptions of and relationship to the world.  This sounds simple but is incredibly complex and involves perceptions and expectations of self and others, culture, values, beliefs, social rules, and so much more.  This exploration helped George recognize how his own assumptions and expectations (e.g., of his organization) contributed to his sense of frustration and disappointment.  George’s core assumption was based on the belief that a federal government organization would have a similar culture of discipline as the military.  Through our discourse, George came to realize that his expectations meant he held the organization to a standard that it could not meet, which in turn left him frustrated.  When he observed the lack of discipline, he responded as he would have in the military, with a very direct and authoritative style of leadership, one not typical of his current organization’s culture.  His direct reports, most with over 25 years in the agency, did not respond well to George’s leadership style.

This realization did not happen quickly for George, nor did it happen all at once.  A principal reason sensemaking takes time to resonate is that many clients, like George, hold tightly to their values and beliefs in ways that limit their flexibility and their receptivity to alternative points of view.  In this case, George truly believed his subordinates were in the wrong (e.g., undisciplined, lazy), he blamed them, and he blamed the culture.  While he was not entirely wrong, it was important he understand the purpose of our sessions was not to assign blame but to find a solution.  In time he came to realize that effective sensemaking involves understanding others, not judging them.  This allowed him to be more receptive to the perspectives of his people.  Up to this point in our example, George was in Stage 1.  This new insight allowed him to view the possibility of change not as an indictment against him but as a normal part of his leadership growth and development.  In this moment, he transitioned to Stage 2.  

In Stage 2, I asked George to envision what an ideal state might look like in his unit.  He described, in detail, what he saw choosing to focus on the behaviors of his people and the product of their work.  He knew very clearly what he wanted from his people in terms of performance and professionalism.  I asked him to consider the needs of his people, their perspectives, and their motivations.  Then I asked him to consider how changes in his leadership style and behavior might influence and motivate them toward the desired end state.  Using insight from Stage 1, he began to develop a vision for how he might adjust and adapt to meet the needs of his people while protecting the integrity of the mission.  

To be transparent, George never quite fully embraced the change process.  He felt a conflict between his perceptions of the situation and his core values.  In other words, he felt any changes he made to his own behavior compromised his sense of integrity.  Because of this feeling, he would frequently regress to Stage 1 during our conversations, but in time he built momentum and progression ensued.  George reluctantly committed to change because he felt it was his responsibility to do so, not because he wanted to.   The learning point here, trepidation or reluctance is an ever-present possibility.  Do not be surprised to see it even among clients who seem to be making progress, this is not something to worry about, simply be prepared to help your client reestablish a connection to their validated reasons for change.  We will continue George’s story in Stage 4.

Another common explanation for a client’s presence in Stage 2, is one we covered in Stage 1, adapting to a sudden life changing event.  While these types of events may allow a client the benefit of Stage 1, sometimes the client has no choice and must begin in Stage 2.  This happens when the catalyst demands rapid or immediate change.  The inability to fully experience Stage 1 can leave most clients resentful and angry, some will resist by fighting against the idea of change.  Others will accept that change is inevitable and move to Stage 2 by considering what the change means for them, their people, and their mission.  Isabella provides us an example of starting the change process in Stage 2.

Isabella was a mid-level manager at a large European company, a wife, and mother to two teenaged children.  When we began our sessions, Isabella wanted to focus on strategies to enhance aspects of her emotional intelligence, specifically focusing on self-regulation.  Because she works in a country, industry, and culture that is male dominated, she wanted to improve her ability to adapt to and influence her environment.  

Three months into our coaching relationship the COVID-19 pandemic struck.  As her country shut down, Isabella found herself forced to work from home.  She felt her world change overnight and struggled to keep up.  Though her roles as a manager, a mother, and a wife remained the same, how she carried out these roles shifted significantly.  She had to manage her people virtually with no experience, training, and limited technology.  She had to work from a small apartment she shared with her husband who also had to work from home, and children who had to school from home.  She had to be a teacher to her children, a role she was unqualified for.  For Isabella, she adopted the mindset early on of, “I don’t have time to dwell on this, I need to figure out what to do now.”  

From her perspective, there was no benefit to reflecting on how COVID made her feel or worry about things she felt she could not control.  Instead, she wanted to jump straight into determining how she needed to adapt for herself, her family, and her job.  She made the decision to move to Stage 2 immediately.  Keep in mind, this neither right nor wrong.  This was her point of view; others may feel and react differently. 

Together we explored some of the most pressing challenges she faced like competing for limited space with a partner who also required workspace, managing noisy children during work hours, educating children while accomplishing her professional responsibilities, and continuing to work on her original coaching goals.  Our Stage 2 discourse focused on envisioning what an ideal picture of a new norm might look like.  She imagined a system that would allow both she and her husband the privacy needed for work calls, a regimented schedule for her kids to receive the education they needed while avoiding the monotony of a traditional 9am to 4pm workday.  

Isabella formed a picture of what this would look like that included seeing herself as a flexible and adaptable professional and mother.  She concluded that achieving this vision meant she had to protect her mental well-being, she needed time and space to center herself, and she needed an outlet to allow her Default Network (Waytz & Mason, 2019) to activate.  This is the neural network responsible for creative thinking.  Because the Default Network does not focus on external stimuli or a specific goal, it would allow the normally hyper focused Isabella a chance to disconnect from the present world.

Isabella transitioned to Stage 3 where she began the process of reverse engineering her vision to better understand what actions could lead to that desired outcome.  For example, to activate her Default Network, she took up an old hobby of knitting, a skill she learned as a child but did not maintain as an adult.  This activity allowed her to be creative without overburdening her already taxed cognitive load.  The act of knitting gave her permission to “check out” for a time and recover.  

When our coaching relationship came to an end, Isabella was into Stage 4, actioning her change.  I checked in with her a short time later and she advised that while she had not achieved the vision exactly as she had seen it in her head, due in part to variables she could not control.  She admitted her situation improved considerably since the outset of COVID.  She also sharred that her new hobby of knitting helped her reconnect with her deceased grandmother, bringing back memories long lost.

Isabella’s rapid transition from Stage 1 to Stage 2 was because she perceived a futility in dwelling on things she could not change.  In this, Isabella is a rarity among my clients.  For most, the shock of COVID-19 and the resulting changes in the environment were overwhelming and required more time to process Stage 1.  I want to be very clear on this point, there is no single right way to process this experience.  For some, the process may look like the grieving process, for others it might be like processing trauma.  What matters is that, as a coach, you are patient with your client and work with them to understand the situation, validate them when appropriate, and help them move towards a productive outcome.

Stage 2 Indicators: some of the observable indicators of stage 2 include the following.

• The client demonstrates well-formed ideas regarding change and what change might look like.

• The client demonstrates they have engaged in some measure of self-initiated exploration into change.

• The client demonstrates insight regarding the pros and cons for change.  This may manifest in the form of an actual list (physical or mental).

• The client is receptive to the idea of change but is unsure of what to focus on.  This may manifest as the client explicitly stating that they know something must change, but they are unsure what or why?  (the ‘how’ is Stage 3).

• The client explicitly indicates that they have reached some threshold and change is needed.  (e.g., “I can’t do this anymore; I need a change.”)

• The client demonstrates a vision for the potential outcome.  (e.g., “When I think of where I will be in 5 years, I see ____.”)

Stage 2 Strategies: facilitating horizontal development in Stage 2 means the client needs to understand the justifications for or against change and must be able to visualize what meaningful change could look like.  Stage 2 may also require the coach be prepared to deal with continued resistance to change.  This might involve the client processing intense feelings about change.  Some strategies to facilitate Stage 2 include the following.

• A client considering change is not the same thing as a client embracing the idea of change.  It is important to be prepared to work with the client to explore change through multiple lenses. 

• One of the most common approaches to evaluating the need for change is the Pros and Cons list.  These lists come in a variety of styles; I use the time-tested Decisional Balance Worksheet.  

• Fostering creativity within a client can be easy for some and extremely difficult for others.  Therefor it is helpful to maintain a toolbox of techniques that spur creativity in different ways.  For more analytical thinkers, I find the Appreciative Inquiry Model and Lateral Thinking Model useful in helping them envision a future state.  For the more creative thinkers, I like to use Storyboarding and Role-Playing.  It is important to remember, one size does not fit all.  Know your client’s preferences before selecting an approach.

• It is common to find clients motivated by negative factors like fear, regret, guilt, and shame.  It is important to identify this early because research suggests that negative motivators are among the least effective approaches when inspiring a desire for change.  When this is the case, I try to help the client connect the change to their value system so that they are moving forward in line with their core beliefs.  

Stage 2 Questions: questions in this stage center on exploring the possibilities of change.  They should, by design, challenge the client to explore and expand their horizons.  Again, these questions may require adjustments prior to using them based on the client’s needs.

• “What are some of the factors/reasons encouraging you to seek change?”

• “What are some of the obstacles that might stand in the way of your desire to change?”

• “What does successful change look like?”

• “If nothing changes, where do you see yourself in six months?”

• “If you adopt change, where do you see yourself in six months?”

• “Where would you like to see yourself in six months?”

• “How does the idea of change make you feel?”

Stage 2 Experience:    

The very first example I provided in this article (Stage 1) was that of Jim.  If you recall, Jim was a seasoned leader accustomed to the work and behaviors conducive to senior leadership positions.  When Jim stepped down to a front-line leadership position, his role changed but his behavior did not.  The early part of my time with Jim focused on Stage 1 exploration, but once Jim realized that change was necessary, he transitioned to Stage 2 and began to explore what that change might look like.

For Jim, an early obstacle to emerge came from the “either/or” frame of mind.  In other words, from his perspective he could either continue to be out of the office networking to support his people or he could spend his time in the office leading in person, but he could not do both.  Through our conversations, I asked Jim to visualize what it might look like if he could do both.  I asked him to describe what being able to do both meant for him and to provide descriptions for the types of behaviors he saw himself doing in that visualization.  This exercise laid the foundation for his eventual transition from an “either/or” mindset to one of “both/and.”  

Jim’s ability to identify actions for both leading and networking allowed him to overcome the “it’s not possible” mindset.  As Jim began to envision what accomplishing both objectives might look like, the impossible became possible.  At the time our coaching relationship came to an end, Jim was in Stage 3.  He was developing a plan of action for how he could do both, a plan which included input from his direct reports.  

To Be Continued…

In part 3 of our series on the Transtheoretical Model, we will explore how to prepare the client for change.  This includes developing a change strategy of new behaviors and actions.  

Bibliography

Boston University Medical Campus. (n.d.). Behavioral Change Models. Retrieved from Boston University Medical Campus: https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPH-Modules/SB/BehavioralChangeTheories/BehavioralChangeTheories_print.html

Boston University School of Public Health. (2019, September 9). The Transtheoretical Model (Stages of Change). Retrieved from Boston University School of Public Health: https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/MPH-Modules/SB/BehavioralChangeTheories/BehavioralChangeTheories6.html

Boyatzis, R. (2017, February 21). The Five Stages of Intentional Change Theory. Retrieved from Key Step Media: https://www.keystepmedia.com/intentional-change-theory/

Boyatzis, R. (2017, February 21). The Five Steps of Intentional Change Theory. Retrieved from Key Step Media: https://www.keystepmedia.com/intentional-change-theory/

Cherry, K. (2019, November 27). The 6 Stages of Behavior Change: The Transtheoretical of Stages of Change Model. Retrieved from Very Well Mind: https://www.verywellmind.com/the-stages-of-change-2794868

De Leon, A. (2020, February 21). Applying the Transtheoretical Model for Health Coaches and Exercise Professionals. Retrieved from ACE Fitness: https://www.acefitness.org/fitness-certifications/ace-answers/exam-preparation-blog/7480/applying-the-transtheoretical-model-for-health-coaches-and-exercise-professionals/

H, P. (2018, September 12). Behavior Change: Evidence of Progress. Retrieved from The National Domestic Violence Hotline: https://www.thehotline.org/2018/09/12/behavior-change-evidence-of-progress/

Harvard Health Publishing. (2012, March). Why Behavior Change is Hard - and Why You Should Keep Trying. Retrieved from Harvard Health Publishing-Harvard Medical School: https://www.health.harvard.edu/mind-and-mood/why-behavior-change-is-hard-and-why-you-should-keep-trying

Hicks, R. (2019, January 9). Coach’s Corner: Traveling the Stages of Behavior Change. Retrieved from American Association for Physician Leadership: https://www.physicianleaders.org/news/coach-corner-traveling-stages-behavior-change

Kreger, N. (2012, September 17). Prochaska’s Transtheoretical Model of Change and Its Application to Coaching. Retrieved from Coach Campus: https://coachcampus.com/coach-portfolios/research-papers/nathan-kreger-transtheoretical-model-of-change/

Liu, K. T., Kueh, Y. C., Arifin, W. N., Kim, Y., & Kuan, G. (2018, December 17). Application of Transtheoretical Model on Behavioral Changes, and Amount of Physical Activity Among University’s Students. Retrieved from Frontiers In Psychology: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02402/full

Moore, M., Highstein, G., Tschannen-Moran, B., & Silverio, G. (n.d.). Coaching Behavior Change. Retrieved from Lippincott: https://downloads.lww.com/wolterskluwer_vitalstream_com/sample-content/9780781772624_Moore/samples/MooreSampChap3.pdf

Pro-Change Behavior Systems Inc. (n.d.). The Transtheoretical Model. Retrieved from Pro-Change Behavior Systems: https://www.prochange.com/transtheoretical-model-of-behavior-change

Prochaska's Stage Model of Change. (n.d.). Retrieved from PC3 Coaching Toolkit: https://pc3coachingtoolkit.pbworks.com/w/page/54072360/Prochaska%27s%20Stage%20Model%20of%20Change

Stages of Change. (n.d.). Retrieved from The University of Rhode Island Cancer Prevention Research Center: https://web.uri.edu/cprc/transtheoretical-model/stages-of-change/

Stages of Change Model (Transtheoretical Model). (n.d.). Retrieved from Rural Health Information Hub : https://www.ruralhealthinfo.org/toolkits/health-promotion/2/theories-and-models/stages-of-change

Sutton, J. (2021, September 26). The 6 Stages of Change: Worksheets for Helping Your Clients. Retrieved from Positive Psychology: https://positivepsychology.com/stages-of-change-worksheets/

Theeboom, T., Van Vianen, A. E., & Beersma, B. (2017, August 8). A Temporal Map of Coaching. Retrieved from Frontiers In Psychology: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01352/full

Vera Whole Health. (2019, September 18). What Is The Transtheoretical Model of Change. Retrieved from Vera Whole Health: https://www.verawholehealth.com/blog/what-is-the-transtheoretical-model-of-change

Virginia Tech University. (n.d.). The Stages of Change. Retrieved from Virginia Tech Continuing and Professional Education: http://www.cpe.vt.edu/gttc/presentations/8eStagesofChange.pdf

Waytz, A., & Mason, M. (2019, January). Your Brain at Work. Harvard Business Review: The Brain Science Behind Business, pp. 11-19.